how much editing is too much?

B

brownbearTLE

New member
I'm in a dilemma here and i'll give the back story..

so i recorded a metal band, and this was their first time ever recording.
The drummer couldn't play to a ghost track, and the guitars were off the drums, and double tracking was sort of a mess; none of the second recorded rhythm guitar matched with the first one. i understood that it was there first studio experience (if you want to call me a studio lol) and i compensated

The drums were midi triggered and i matched them with the guitar parts (no quantization, manually moved each kick part with each chug and everything in their respected place), i used flex editing for the other guitar (a DI), then added a transient designer to the first guitar for vocalign to pick up on the attack for the other guitar, then bass was quantized using flex to a guitar track.

This may seem like a lot but it really tightened up the performance without making it sterile.

My problem is their guitarist picked out every single millisecond out of place guitar/vocal/drum track and wants them perfectly edited.
If i do that it sounds sterile, and just "too" perfect.

I'm not asking for advice but feedback on what you guys would do in that situation?
perfectly edit? or keep the mix from sounding like a robot? :confused:
 
Just so I understand the question...

The band already can't play in time... you shuffled stuff around and made it sound like they could, and they think you haven't gone far enough and want you to further edit it, but you think doing so will lose that nice rock 'n' roll feel you've managed to create for them that they couldn't create themselves...

Hmm... they paying you?
 
More reverb, make it harder for the guy to pick out the flaws. (kidding of course / sort of)

If you're shifting actual parts and not just midi parts, that's too much editing IMO. At some point, your time is more valuable than there lack of perfection. It is what it is, as the saying goes.

You might try a WAV to MID option on the drums and only the drums, then MID to WAV that with the correct timing. Beyond that if the groups sucks, you're lie-ing to them by not giving them a taste of the least edited version. And if they like that version, you've saved yourself hours, days, months, years of your life. (which you probably weren't going to get paid for anyway)
 
... what Armistice said.

For me, there would be a balance between my personal satisfaction and money, time, effort. If they suck already, then personal satisfaction is not a factor.
 
Cowbell and/or castanets...you might think it sounds crazy, but either has the ability to fix almost any off-time rhythmic issue...
...in your case, I would use both...in large quantities.

;)


If that isn't an option, have the band practice some more and then re-track everything....and have them play to a click track just to be sure. :)
 
add a little egg shaker

or get the guy to replay the track with headphones 10 times and splice the good stuff together.

But I would say as a general rule, I try not to spend more than maybe 2 hours per minute of song...

If I am spending more time than that I probably have problems that no amount of reverb can fix :laughings::laughings::laughings:
 
It's often the case that musicians don't really appreciate how much work it is to "fix" a poorly played recording with editing, which chances are won't solve the problem ultimately anyway.

There does come a point when you have to draw the line as to how much you can do without making it worse, and I think that the fact that you're asking this question should really already give you your answer.

The post-production is your call, not the guitarist's. If you feel it won't get any better by editing, then I'd be on your side when you tell him so. There has got to be some element of performance in the recording, or you might as well MIDI program the whole lot to start with and be done with it.
 
I'm big on editing/sliding/tuning, etc but you have to start with a decent take or it's all for naught. If they can't play in time, well, that's their problem. If they're paying, do what they ask (within reason). I'd still ask them to retrack it if it's that bad.
 
For those of you using logic, multiple takes are compacted in a folder on the track
lets just say one thirty second clip had almost 20 takes, none in time of each other.

Just out of interest, does this band play live ?
Click to expand...
They do play some local shows that i've been too, but maybe 4 or 5 tops and they've only been a band since December


Its just these days everything edited to a grid is what sounds the "best" i guess

But thanks everyone
 
Suggest that they treat this recording as just a demo of what they can do later, then suggest that everyone in the band, especially the drummer, goes away and practices to a click track (metronome) for a few weeks. If they refuse say that the only way to fix it is to add piano accordion and banjo.

Cheers

alan.
joke1.gifimages.jpeg
 
brownbearTLE said:
I'm in a dilemma here and i'll give the back story..

so i recorded a metal band, and this was their first time ever recording.
The drummer couldn't play to a ghost track, and the guitars were off the drums, and double tracking was sort of a mess; none of the second recorded rhythm guitar matched with the first one. i understood that it was there first studio experience (if you want to call me a studio lol) and i compensated

The drums were midi triggered and i matched them with the guitar parts (no quantization, manually moved each kick part with each chug and everything in their respected place), i used flex editing for the other guitar (a DI), then added a transient designer to the first guitar for vocalign to pick up on the attack for the other guitar, then bass was quantized using flex to a guitar track.

This may seem like a lot but it really tightened up the performance without making it sterile.

My problem is their guitarist picked out every single millisecond out of place guitar/vocal/drum track and wants them perfectly edited.
If i do that it sounds sterile, and just "too" perfect.

I'm not asking for advice but feedback on what you guys would do in that situation?
perfectly edit? or keep the mix from sounding like a robot? :confused:
Click to expand...

Stupid scenarios like this is exactly why I don't record people. I'd tell them to get fucked. They can't possibly have enough money for me to put up with all that.
 
In your case here, the costumer is always right ..... that is if they are paying you for this extra studio time/your time.
 
I just don't get any of this and feel sorry for the op.

I don't record other people and don't even record myself all that often, but when I do, I never have to slide or adjust the timing of anything after the fact (and I am not a great musician by any means).

How can someone feel as though they are in a position to have their music recorded if they are incapable of playing in a manner that does not require someone else to move their parts around after the fact to get them to fit rhythmically? That just doesn't make sense to me at all...is this common?

You don't need my advice, but I have to say I am amazed at what you describe as already having been done and would not consider going further down that path.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top